Another mistaken 'conceptzia'

by Laurie MylroieJerusalem Post December 4, 2002

The Clinton administration "spun" America's terrorist problem when it re-emerged in February 1993, with the bombing of the World Trade Center, one month into Bill Clinton's first term in office. New York FBI believed that was a "false flag" operation run by Iraq, working with and hiding behind Islamic militants.

But Clinton did not want to hear it (he thought he took care of the problem slyly if the FBI was correct when he hit Iraqi intelligence headquarters several months later). So his administration claimed a new terrorism had emerged, consisting of "loose networks" of Islamic militants, unsupported by states.

Al-Qaida has struck again, or so it seems. "A virtual enemy," as a Clinton administration official describes it, al-Qaida is everywhere and anywhere. It is no less a threat than it was a year ago, according to CIA director George Tenet although the Taliban are defeated; al-Qaida's leadership is dead or on the run; and more than 3,000 others have been detained. "You see it in Bali. You see it in Kuwait," Tenet affirmed. And now, presumably, we saw it in Mombasa.

US government officials recently stated that missiles shot at an Israeli passenger plane were linked to a failed al-Qaida attack on an American fighter jet in Saudi Arabia. But does this idea that al-Qaida is acting alone really make sense? Not at all.

The Clinton administration "spun" America's terrorist problem when it re-emerged in February 1993, with the bombing of the World Trade Center, one month into Bill Clinton's first term in office. New York FBI believed that was a "false flag" operation run by Iraq, working with and hiding behind Islamic militants.

But Clinton did not want to hear it (he thought he took care of the problem slyly if the FBI was correct when he hit Iraqi intelligence headquarters several months later). So his administration claimed a new terrorism had emerged, consisting of "loose networks" of Islamic militants, unsupported by states.

Israel might have recognized this for the dangerous misconception it was, were it not for the unrealistic expectations that set in regarding the "peace process" when Yitzhak Rabin was prime minister. Already then, a new "conceptzia" had begun to blur Western vision.

"Conceptzia" was the term coined by the Agranat Commission to describe the intelligence failure that led to the surprise of the Yom Kippur War. As a friend at Tel Aviv University explained, "It is much more than a mistake." It is a fundamentally flawed understanding of events that prevents one from seeing what is before his eyes.

The new conceptzia is easy to explain. By the mid-1990s, the notion had taken hold that the US had decisively defeated Iraq in 1991 (in fact, many, including prime minister Yitzhak Shamir, were appalled when the US ended the war with Saddam in power).

Then following Iraq's defeat, so the conceptzia goes, a new threat emerged the spread of Islamic militants after the 1992 collapse of the communist regime in Afghanistan. Thus, the two threats, Iraq and the spread of Islamic militancy, are separated in time and space.

BUT THE Gulf War never really ended. The two phenomena the ongoing war with Iraq and the spread of Islamic militancy existed at the same time, the 1990s, and in the same space, the Sunni Muslim Middle East. Did they merge?

That is an important question, which almost no one asks. But it would seem they did. Consider Egypt, a key member of the anti-Iraq coalition. Without Egyptian backing, the Arab League would never have voted to support Iraq's ouster from Kuwait, as it did in August 1990.

Egypt seemed to have beaten back its post-Afghanistan Islamic challenge by 1997. On November 17, however, more foreign tourists were killed in one day in an attack at Luxor than were killed during Egypt's entire post-Afghan Islamic insurgency.

The attack occurred as the first crisis over UNSCOM ended. More crises would follow, as Saddam deliberately moved to end weapons inspections. When the next crisis began in early 1998, Egypt, through the Arab League, took a strong position that it not be resolved by force. No major terrorist attack has occurred in Egypt since.

What happened at Luxor? If Iraqi intelligence joins with an indigenous militant group, isn't the ensuing attack likely to be far more lethal than what that group might do on its own? Of course. Recently, I discussed this with the distinguished historian Bernard Lewis, who concurred. The subtle hints that Iraq was involved in Luxor were missed by those who jumped to the conclusion the militants had struck again, but not by the Egyptians.

A major debate rages in Washington as to whether Iraq supports al-Qaida. As Washington Post columnist Jim Hoagland wrote, "The links become clear with a little digging. You miss them only if you have a strong need not to know." The attacks on tourists in Bali and Mombasa come as momentum builds for war with Iraq. As one US official, part of the new Bush team, noted, their main purpose is "to divert us from the war on Iraq.... Terrorism is an instrument of state, not a wildcat NGO." The conceptzia needs urgent reexamination. If Israel accepts and endorses an erroneous explanation for this terrorism, that will only increase the risk more will follow.

Author and Expert on Saddam Hussein to Deliver 1998-99 Roemer Memorial Lecture on World Affairs

Dr. Mylroi holds a bachelor's degree from Cornell University and MA and Ph.D. degrees in political science from Harvard University. In addition to her affiliation with the Foreign Policy Research Institute, Dr. Mylroi publishes Iraq News and has authored several books, monographs and articles on Saddam Hussein, Iraq and the Middle East. She is co-author of "Saddam Hussein and the Crisis in the Gulf" (Random House, 1990), a number one best-selling book in the U.S. which has been translated into 13 languages. Her articles have appeared in The Atlantic Monthly, Commentary, The National Interest, The New Republic and Newsweek, as well as The New York Times, Wall Street Journal and Washington Post.

Mylroi has held faculty positions at Harvard University and the United States Naval War College.

Among her many experiences, Mylroi has been a Senior Fulbright Research Fellow at Tel Aviv University, a Fellow of American Professors for Peace in the Middle East, advisor on Iraq policy to the 1992 Clinton presidential campaign and a consultant to ABC News.

The Roemer Lecture Series was endowed by the late Dr. Spencer J. Roemer in honor of his brother, Kenneth, to bring issues of world affairs to Geneseo's undergraduates.

"Study of Revenge" is, first of all, the story of the Trade Center bombing. Mylroie contends that the mastermind behind the bombing was an Iraqi intelligence agent, Ramzi Yousef, who escaped and left behind the Muslim fundamentalists who participated in the plot and were meant to be caught.

She argues that the Clinton administration's mishandling of the event led to the emergence of a fraudulent and dangerous theory about Middle East terrorism--that it is no longer primarily state-sponsored but is carried out by individuals or "loose networks." The misunderstanding is particularly dangerous in light of the prospects for biological terrorism.

Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Secretary of Defense"...argues powerfully that the mastermind of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing was actually an agent of Iraqi intelligence."

James M. Fox, Former Director, New York FBI OfficeMylroie's book, Study of Revenge, is one of the most comprehensive and best-researched reviews of the bombing investigation.

Jeane J. Kirkpatrick, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, 1981-1985"Laurie Mylroie understands that what we do not yet know about terrorism, crime, and war may be more important..." --This text refers to the Hardcover edition.

"Study of Revenge," the sequel to the New York Times best-seller "Saddam Hussein and the Crisis in the Gulf," co-authored by Laurie Mylroie and Judith Miller, exposes the threat Saddam Hussein still poses to Americans.

The Gulf War never ended for Saddam Hussein. He had already recovered sufficiently by 1993 to undertake a campaign of terror, of which only the first two acts were planned in advance: the January shootings outside CIA headquarters in Virginia and the February bombing of one tower of the World Trade Center in New York, in an attempt to topple it against its twin.

"Study of Revenge" is, first of all, the story of the Trade Center bombing. Mylroie contends that the mastermind behind the bombing was an Iraqi intelligence agent, Ramzi Yousef, who escaped and left behind the Muslim fundamentalists who participated in the plot and were meant to be caught. She argues that the Clinton administration's mishandling of the event led to the emergence of a fraudulent and dangerous theory about Middle East terrorism--that it is no longer primarily state-sponsored but is carried out by individuals or "loose networks." The misunderstanding is particularly dangerous in light of the prospects for biological terrorism.

In addition to her account of events around the bombing, Mylroie describes how Saddam Hussein has steadily regained strength and eroded the system of postwar constraints that were supposed to hold him in check. She suggests that because of the proscribed unconventional-weapons capabilities Saddam retained in violation of the Gulf War cease-fire--and without the check of U.N. weapons inspectors--he is far more dangerous than is generally recognized.

Mylroie bases her case on a meticulous analysis of the government's evidence in the terrorism trials that followed the Trade Center bombing. Her book is written as a detective story, and the reader is invited to conduct the investigation into state sponsorship of the terrorism that the U.S. government failed to conduct.

Book InfoEngages the reader in a gripping examination of the evidence regarding Ramzi Yousef and his terrorism. Softcover. --This text refers to the Paperback edition.

The destruction of the twin towers of the World Trade Center and the attack on the Pentagon -- all within one hour on September 11, 2001 -- demonstrated America's shocking vulnerability to terrorism.

Yet terror had already emerged on America's shores eight years earlier, when the mysterious terrorist mastermind, Ramzi Yousef (arrested after a botched attempt to down a dozen U.S. airlines) bombed the World Trade Center in an attempt to fell the buildings...

Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Secretary of Defense"...argues powerfully that the mastermind of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing was actually an agent of Iraqi intelligence." --This text refers to the Hardcover edition.

Richard N. Perle, Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Policy, 1981-1987 "Move over, Tom Clancy; Laurie Mylroie has written the year's thriller. Based on a thorough examination of the evidence... --This text refers to the Hardcover edition.

Jeane J. Kirkpatrick, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, 1981-1985"Laurie Mylroie understands that what we do not yet know about terrorism, crime, and war may be more important..." --This text refers to the Hardcover edition.

The destruction of the twin towers of the World Trade Center and the attack on the Pentagon -- all within one hour on September 11, 2001 -- demonstrated America's shocking vulnerability to terrorism.

Yet terror had already emerged on America's shores eight years earlier, when the mysterious terrorist mastermind, Ramzi Yousef (arrested after a botched attempt to down a dozen U.S. airlines) bombed the World Trade Center in an attempt to fell the buildings. His attacks were viewed as the harbinger of a new terrorism, carried out by an elusive enemy driven by religious fanaticism to unprecedented hatred of the United States.

But is that perception accurate? A real-life detective story, The War Against America engages the reader in a gripping examination of the evidence regarding Yousef and his terrorism. It reveals the split between New York and Washington that emerged during the investigation and tells a terrifying tale of America left exposed and vulnerable following the mishandling of what was once the most ambitious terrorist attack ever attempted on U.S. soil.

HEAR:

the attacks on America

Dan Rather saying: terrorism came to America "bigtime" during clinton years

Dan Rather relating OBL protégé, Ramzi Yousefthreat to clinton FBI that the terrorists WILL complete the job

Pay special attention to Dan Rather's little story about terrorism hitting the U.S. "bigtime" during the clintons' tenure.

In particular, connect the following dots: the '93 WTC bombing. a certain bin Laden protégé and clinton's admission that he passed up bin Laden. Note clinton's spurious argument for this monumental failure.

To this day, clinton seems not to understand that bin Laden is -- and was in 1996 -- an enemy of the state, not a simple criminal.

clinton still seems not to get it -- the same terrorist --the terrorist he refused to take--hit the same building in '93.

Notwithstanding this, to hear clinton tell it, his disastrous decision not to take bin Laden when offered on a silver platter by Sudan, (arguably the worst decision ever made by a president), derived from his scrupulous avoidance of abusing power and trashing laws...

In May, 1996, American diplomats were informed in a Sudanese government fax that Bin Laden was about to be expelled -- giving Washington another chance to seize him. The decision not to do so went to the very top of the White House, according to former administration sources.

They say that the clear focus of American policy was to discourage the state sponsorship of terrorism. So persuading Khartoum to expel Bin Laden was in itself counted as a clear victory. The administration was "delighted".

Bin Laden took off from Khartoum on May 18 in a chartered C-130 plane with 150 of his followers, including his wives. He was bound for Jalalabad in eastern Afghanistan. On the way the plane refuelled in the Gulf state of Qatar, which has friendly relations with Washington, but he was allowed to proceed unhindered.

Barely a month later, on June 25, a 5,000lb truck bomb ripped apart the front of Khobar Towers, a US military housing complex in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. The explosion killed 19 American servicemen. Bin Laden was immediately suspected...

The Clinton administration "spun" America's terrorist problem when it re-emerged in February 1993, with the bombing of the World Trade Center, one month into Bill Clinton's first term in office. New York FBI believed that was a "false flag" operation run by Iraq, working with and hiding behind Islamic militants.

But Clinton did not want to hear it (he thought he took care of the problem slyly if the FBI was correct when he hit Iraqi intelligence headquarters several months later). So his administration claimed a new terrorism had emerged, consisting of "loose networks" of Islamic militants, unsupported by states.

In May, 1996, American diplomats were informed in a Sudanese government fax that Bin Laden was about to be expelled -- giving Washington another chance to seize him. The decision not to do so went to the very top of the White House, according to former administration sources.

They say that the clear focus of American policy was to discourage the state sponsorship of terrorism. So persuading Khartoum to expel Bin Laden was in itself counted as a clear victory. The administration was "delighted".

Bin Laden took off from Khartoum on May 18 in a chartered C-130 plane with 150 of his followers, including his wives. He was bound for Jalalabad in eastern Afghanistan. On the way the plane refuelled in the Gulf state of Qatar, which has friendly relations with Washington, but he was allowed to proceed unhindered.

Barely a month later, on June 25, a 5,000lb truck bomb ripped apart the front of Khobar Towers, a US military housing complex in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. The explosion killed 19 American servicemen. Bin Laden was immediately suspected...

Just look around this chamber. We have members from virtually every racial, ethnic, and religious background. And America is stronger for it. But as we have seen, these differences all too often spark hatred and division, even here at home. . . This is not the American way. We must draw the line. Without delay, we must pass the Hate Crimes Prevention Act and the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. And we should reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act.

bill clinton, State of Union Speech, January 27, 2000

"I'm sorry, but the president is one of the crudest men I have ever encountered in government service," says one female agent. "He has no respect for women."

Among the comments clinton made in presence of Secret Service agents:

. Frequent speculation on the oral sex skills of women the president saw or met in receiving lines;

. References to the size of a woman's breasts, legs or figure;

. Sexual jokes.

After the Monica Lewinsky story broke, however, clinton toned down his rhetoric and behavior in front of his Secret Service agents, but those who guarded the president say enough of them saw and heard things which could be damaging to clinton.

"It depends on who Ken Starr calls," says one ex-agent. "The people who are on the job today are not necessarily the ones who know the most."

Turnover In clinton's Secret Service Detail 'Highest That Anyone Can Remember'

In the months that follow, reporters drop the issue. Feminists say little or nothing. Rape crisis center workers acknowledge that Broaddrick's case, including her reluctance to come forward, is typical of victims of sexual assault. But they decline to speak against clinton. Some cite the federal funding they receive as a result of the Violence Against Women Act, which was signed into law by clinton.

This country has many challenges. We will not deny, we will not ignore, we will not pass along our problems to other Congresses, to other presidents, and other generations. (Applause.) We will confront them with focus and clarity and courage...

Sending Americans into battle is the most profound decision a President can make. The technologies of war have changed; the risks and suffering of war have not. For the brave Americans who bear the risk, no victory is free from sorrow. This nation fights reluctantly, because we know the cost and we dread the days of mourning that always come.

We seek peace. We strive for peace. And sometimes peace must be defended. A future lived at the mercy of terrible threats is no peace at all. If war is forced upon us, we will fight in a just cause and by just means -- sparing, in every way we can, the innocent. And if war is forced upon us, we will fight with the full force and might of the United States military -- and we will prevail. (Applause.)

Justice is our Right...Third Party calls...the RINOs frown...
The wise man wrote his words upon the rocks...
But MUD's not bound to follow suit!!
The Left shall bend...Slick's ConDamnation's Nigh!!
If Slick's Treas'nous Crimes YOU Condone...yer choice isn't mine!!

Slick's sorry...Left's sorry...

Med'yuh never called!! MUD waited for Left's calls...
Left's lies and mis-directions are driving US away!!
Then Limbaugh sang...Left's Brain-washin' washed away...
Left says that I should "Just Move ON!!"...that Choice isn't mine!!

Folks, It's Time To ROCK, RATS're noisey, I should know!!
We'll be yer FReedomWriters...
Dubyuh, lead US to the show
Right done made some plans for movin' US to the Right!!
So, find a Lib'ral dweeb
And I know Y'ALL Can Teach Her Right!!

Left Can Go to HELL!!
Lord, DemRATS are a mess!!
It seems that one of Slick's crew...
Hadta go and hadta CONFESS, oh yes!!
Well, the police said, "Slick Can't Rape Anymore!!"
What a shame
Won't you come and FReep, World...
And meet Ol' MUD the ClintonBane!!p>

Gonna ROCK the NextAge...
Right, Git Ready to ROLL!!
We got Sick Tyrant Thugs to SMITE...
To do one more show, oh no
Gonna git Slick a PrisonHome...
Won't that be grand?!
When I come parole each year
We're Gonna FReep Slick Again...and AGAIN!!

POWER is RATS' Aim, Lib-uh-rulls...
Left, Show Shame!!
Confessin' is GREAT, mindless WHORE'd...
Ignorance ain't no shame!!!
Just Show Yer Shamed...by the Left!!
Show Yer Shame!!
Socialists HATE...LIBERTY!!
Don't YOU Join RATS' Shame!!

PRESIDENT BUSH: Three weeks from now--two weeks from tomorrow, America goes to the polls and you're going to have to decide who you want to lead this country ...

On foreign affairs, some think it's irrelevant. I believe it's not. We're living in an interconnected world...And if a crisis comes up, ask who has the judgment and the experience and, yes, the character to make the right decision?

And, lastly, the other night on character Governor Clinton said it's not the character of the president but the character of the presidency. I couldn't disagree more. Horace Greeley said the only thing that endures is character. And I think it was Justice Black who talked about great nations, like great men, must keep their word.

And so the question is, who will safeguard this nation, who will safeguard our people and our children? I need your support, I ask for your support. And may God bless the United States of America.

"MAC-AULIFFE!!"
(To be sung to Hank Williams, Jr.'s version of his daddy's song, "KAW-LIGA!!")

McAuliffe is a two-bit minion grovellin' fer RAT's Whores!!
He sold his Soul to Ol' Slick Willie...sold Chi-Coms OUR Guns of War!!
MAC-AULIFFE!! OOOOOOOOOHHH!! Grinnin' there as if Right doesn't know...
FReepers demand answers...you gotta go!!

T-Mac always wore his pin-striped suits and pissed good folks off a lot...
That Traitor stole from Union folks and smoked way too much pot!!
MAC-AULIFFE!!! OOOOOOOHHH!!! Too corrupt to ever do what's Right...
Because yer heart is stained from constant lyin'!!

(CHORUS)
IN-DICT McAuliffe...Equal Justice demands this!!
CON-VICT McAuliffe...'Tis in Prison he shall live!!
Is it any wonder that Slick's face is red...
McAuliffe, yer Party's good as dead!!

McAuliffe is a lowly minion...Sheeple just don't care.
His fate is fixed to the Clinton Traitors but the Voters ain't aware!!
MAC-AULIFFE!!! OOOOOOOOOOHHH!! In yer trial evidence'll grow...
Right'll make sure, then, the Sheeple know.

Then one day that Winnick shyster bought the Indian maid
And took her, oh, so far away, but young McAuliffe stayed
MAC-AULIFFE!! OOOOOOOOOHHH!! Punk stole from Winnick's Global Crossing...
And wishes he was still McLowlife's Scheme.

(CHORUS)
IN-DICT MAC-AULIFFE!! Equal Justice demands this!!
CON-VICT MAC-AULIFFE!! In a prison cell he shall live!!
Is it any wonder that Left's face is red...
MAC-AULIFFE...RAT Party's good as dead!!!

Mudboy Slim

Me and the Missuz were married nine years ago today at the St. John's Church on Church Hill in Richmond, VA...the same church wherein Patrick Henry gave his famous "Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death" speech. Any role that this thread can play in the Inevitable Indictment of DNC Chairman Terrence "The Punk" McAuliffe is dedicated to my partner-fer-life.

Anybody else out there got Terry McAuliffe's Home Address on their Rolodex?!

The war against America by Iraq continues. Do you have in any of your archives the recording or writeup where Saddam Hussein THANKED Bill Clinton? (for what someone asks? for allowing his treacheries and his war to continue unchallenged by the Traitor in Chief Clinton, of course!)

Thanks..."If I Were the President"
(To be sung to the Four Tops' "If I were a Carpenter...")

If I were the President...and you hurt my Nation...
Would you label me IGNORANT?! Why'd you label Bush IGNORANT?!!**
Won't you bite me, Medyuh?!!
If I'd SLAUGHTERED Waco's kids...would you still love me?
Ohhhh...considerin' the necks I'd break...don't reckon you'd like me much...

A retired Air Force weapons engineer who worked on a number of the military's super-secret "black budget" programs is warning that New York Sen. Hillary Clinton's ascension last month to the Senate Armed Services Committee constitutes a national security risk.

"I am deeply concerned that Hillary Clinton serving on the Senate Armed Services Committee represents a clear and present danger to our national security," said the weapons officer...

"Considering all the sensitive information released by her husband's administration to North Korea and China, I have grave national security concerns about information that would be revealed to her and her staff regarding many of our most secret military capabilities," the Air Force whistleblower explained...

North Korea doesn't stop doing anything. Then comes 1993. Abruptly, with inspectors hot on their trail, the Kims pull out of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. The reactor at Yongbyon is up and running. The Clinton administration swings into action. By the end of 1994, the Clintonites announce with great fanfare a deal called "the Agreed Framework."

The "Agreed Framework" looks suspiciously like the 1985 deal with the Soviets. The U.S. agreed to build two reactors in North Korea. But wait, there was so much more. We also agreed to supply Dear Leader (by this time, Great Leader had died) with fuel oil and food aid. This bribe was, as they used to say on game shows, a package worth something like $4 billion.

Bill Clinton celebrated. "North Korea will freeze and then dismantle its nuclear program," he announced in one of the innumerable statements for which history will deride him.

Then, in 1998, North Korea got scary all over again by launching an intercontinental missile directly over Japan. The United States demanded that the North Koreans allow international inspectors into the country to determine the extent of its nuclear program.

The North Koreans said: Fine; pay us $300 million and we'll let the inspectors in. The United States went one better. It didn't hand over the cash. Instead, it sent food aid in a package worth far more than $300 million.

Even after this debacle, the Clintonites kept on acting as if their 1994 deal was a good one. "We made a lot of progress with them," the president said on Dec. 28, 2000. "I think it will make the world a much safer place. I feel very good about what we've done."

Now here we are. We know North Korea has at least one nuclear weapon - and that, unchecked, it will be able to make 50 nuclear bombs a year by 2009. Yet influential voices continue to insist that all we need to do is continue to give Dear Leader money - the very money he uses to subsidize his nation's efforts to become a major nuclear power.

Hence, Tom Friedman in the New York Times: "When dealing with a heavily armed crazy state like North Korea. . . . All you can do is is shrink its nuclear programs in exchange for food, and expand trade and investment to alleviate some of its abject poverty - so when it does collapse, it does the least damage possible."

North Korea is the perfect object lesson in the failure of appeasement: Without appeasement, it would not be a nuclear power today. And yet the Friedmans of the world keep insisting that appeasement is the only workable strategy.

Rumor has it William Jefferson Clinton himself is to recite Honest Abe's lines in this New Year's Eve pageant. Whoever writes these scripts has a natural talent for irony. For some irrepressible reason, one cannot help but think of that costume party in "The Manchurian Candidate,'' complete with Red Queen and Abe Lincoln in stovepipe hat and fake beard.

The Republicans' latest talking point is that the breach of national security enabled by clinton must be simple incompetence, that the concept that anyone in government would commit treason is too outrageous even to contemplate.

If the Republicans believe what they are saying, then they are morons.

If they don't believe what they are saying, then they, too, are traitors.

Outrageousness is an essential element of clinton corruption. The clinton crimes -- rape, murder -- and now treason -- are so outrageous that they allow clinton hacks to reasonably brand all clinton accusers clinton-hating neo-Nazi crazies (notwithstanding the plain fact that some of us are Northeast Jews of leftist origin)..

Yet privately few clintonites would deny that Bill Clinton facilitated China espionage. Their only question: "Why?"

Some call clinton a quisling, a Manchurian Candidate, bought off in Little Rock by Riady and company decades ago (and much too cheaply, according to his Chinese benefactors), trading our national security for his political power. This argument is persuasive but incomplete; clinton, a certifiable megalomaniac, is driven ultimately by his solipsistic, messianic world view and by that which ultimately quashes all else -- his toxic legacy.

William J. Broad suggests (Spying Isn't the Only Way to Learn About Nukes, The New York Times, May 30, 1999) that clinton had another reason to empower China and disembowel America. Broad argues that clinton sought to disseminate our atomic secrets proactively in order to implement his postmodern, quite inane epistemological theory, namely, that, contrary to currently held dogma, knowledge is not power after all -- that, indeed, quite the contrary is the case.

Broad writes in part:

Since 1993, officials say, the Energy Department's "openness initiative" has released at least 178 categories of atom secrets. By contrast, the 1980s saw two such actions...

Its overview of the disclosures, "Restricted Data Declassification Decisions," dated January 1999 and more than 140 pages long, lists such things as how atom bombs can be boosted in power, key steps in making hydrogen bombs, the minimum amount (8.8 pounds) of plutonium or uranium fuel needed for an atom bomb and the maximum time it takes an exploding atomic bomb to ignite an H-bomb's hydrogen fuel (100 millionths of a second).

No grade-B physicist from any university could figure this stuff. It took decades of experience gained at a cost of more than $400 billion.

The release of the secrets started as a high-stakes bet that openness would lessen, not increase, the world's vulnerability to nuclear arms and war. John Holum, who heads arms control at the State Department, told Congress last year that the test ban "essentially eliminates" the possibility of a renewed international race to develop new kinds of nuclear arms...

"The United States must stand as leader," O'Leary told a packed news conference in December 1993 upon starting the process. "We are declassifying the largest amount of information in the history of the department."

Critics, however, say the former secrets are extremely valuable to foreign powers intent on making nuclear headway. Gaffney, the former Reagan official, disparaged the giveaway as "dangling goodies in front of people to get them to sign up into our arms-control agenda."

Thomas B. Cochran,:..."In terms of the phenomenology of nuclear weapons...the cat is out of the bag."

Broad would have us believe we are watching "Being There" and not "The Manchurian Candidate."His argument is superficially appealing as most reasonable people would conclude that it requires the simplemindedness of a Chauncy Gardener (in "Being There") to reason that instructing China and a motley assortment of terrorist nations on how to beef up their atom bombs and how not to omit the "key steps" when building hydrogen bombs would somehow blunt and not stimulate their appetites for bigger and better bombs and a higher position in the power food chain.

But it is Broad's failure to fully connect the dots -- clinton's wholesale release of atomic secrets, decades of Chinese money sluicing into clinton's campaigns, clinton pushing the test ban treaty, clinton's concomitant sale of supercomputers, and clinton's noxious legacy -- that blows his argument to smithereens and reduces his piece to just another clinton apologia by The New York Times.

The idea that an individual can be convicted of the crime of treason only if there is treasonous intent or *mens rea* runs contrary to the concept of strict liability crimes. That doctrine (Park v United States, (1974) 421 US 658,668) established the principle of 'strict liability' or 'liability without fault' in certain criminal cases, usually involving crimes which endanger the public welfare.

Calling his position on the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty "an historic milestone," (if he must say so himself) clinton believed that if he could get China to sign it, he would go down in history as the savior of mankind. This was 11 August 1995.

According to James Risen and Jeff Gerth of The New York Times, "the legacy codes and the warhead data that goes with them" -- apparently stolen from the Los Alamos weapons lab by scientist, Wen Ho Lee aided and abetted by bill clinton, hillary clinton, the late Ron Brown, Sandy Berger, Hazel O'Leary, Janet Reno, Eric Holder and others in the clinton administration [not to mention congressional clinton accomplices Glenn, Daschle, Bumpers, Harkin, Boxer, Feinstein, Lantos, Levin. Lautenberg, Torricelli et al.] -- "could [especially when combined with the supercomputers that clinton sold to China to help them finish the job] be particularly valuable for a country, like China, that has signed onto the nuclear test ban treaty and relies solely on computer simulations to upgrade and maintain its nuclear arsenal. The legacy codes are now used to maintain the American nuclear arsenal through computer simulation.

Most of Lee's transfers occurred in 1994 and 1995, just before China signed the test ban treaty in 1996, according to American officials."

Few who have observed clinton would argue against the proposition that this legacy-obsessed megalomaniac would trade our legacy codes for his rehabilitated legacy in a Monica minute and to hell with "the children."

Clinton's failure to grasp the opportunity to unravel increasingly organized extremists, coupled with Berger's assessments of their potential to directly threaten the U.S., represents one of the most serious foreign policy failures in American history

Had George Will written Sleaze, the sequel (the "sequel" is, of course, hillary) after 9-11-01, I suspect that he would have had to forgo the above conceit, as the doubt expressed in the setup phrase was, from that day forward, no longer operational.

When the clintons left office, I predicted that the country would eventually learn--sadly, the hard way--that this depraved, self-absorbed and inept pair had placed America (and the world) in mortal danger. But I was thinking years, not months.

If leftist pandering keeps the disenfranchized down in perpetuity, clinton pandering,("it's the economy, stupid"), kept the middle and upper classes wilfully ignorant for eight years.

And ironically, both results (leftist social policy and the clinton economy) are equally illusory, fraudulent. It is becoming increasingly clear that clinton covertly cooked the books even as he assiduously avoided essential actions that would have negatively impacted the economy--the ultimate source of his continued power--actions like, say, going after the terrorists.

It is critically important that hillary clinton fail in her grasp for power; read Peggy Noonan's little book, 'The Case Against Hillary Clinton' and Barbara Olson's two books; it is critical that the West de-clintonize, but that will be automatic once it is understood that the clintons risked civilization itself in order to gain and retain power.

It shouldn't take books, however, to see that a leader is a dangerous, self-absorbed sicko. People should be able to figure that out for themselves. The electorate must be taught to think, to reason. It must be able to spot spin, especially in this age of the electronic demagogue.

I am not hopeful. As Bertrand Russell noted, "Most people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so. "

*George Will continues: There is reason to believe that he is a rapist ("You better get some ice on that," Juanita Broaddrick says he told her concerning her bit lip), and that he bombed a country to distract attention from legal difficulties arising from his glandular life, and that. ... Furthermore, the bargain that he and his wife call a marriage refutes the axiom that opposites attract. Rather, she, as much as he, perhaps even more so, incarnates Clintonism

The Clinton administration "spun" America's terrorist problem when it re-emerged in February 1993, with the bombing of the World Trade Center, one month into Bill Clinton's first term in office. New York FBI believed that was a "false flag" operation run by Iraq, working with and hiding behind Islamic militants.

But Clinton did not want to hear it (he thought he took care of the problem slyly if the FBI was correct when he hit Iraqi intelligence headquarters several months later). So his administration claimed a new terrorism had emerged, consisting of "loose networks" of Islamic militants, unsupported by states.

Israel might have recognized this for the dangerous misconception it was, were it not for the unrealistic expectations that set in regarding the "peace process" when Yitzhak Rabin was prime minister. Already then, a new "conceptzia" had begun to blur Western vision.

"Conceptzia" was the term coined by the Agranat Commission to describe the intelligence failure that led to the surprise of the Yom Kippur War. As a friend at Tel Aviv University explained, "It is much more than a mistake." It is a fundamentally flawed understanding of events that prevents one from seeing what is before his eyes.

Excellent post Mia T. as always, and a constant reminder of just who the Clinton's were and are. I am more puzzled than ever however, as to why HRC is on the SASC as a permanent member let alone on that committee at all. Where does her power come from, the FBI files?

Mia T, the only way to derail this cancer is to expose who her backers are and their agenda. One group that truly baffles me as to their support of the Clintons are the Jewish people in this country, they still lionize them, why?

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.